Disposed

M.G. Gangaiah v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Dec 2021WP/20490/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking police protection for the petitioner. The Court observed that mere institution of civil proceedings does not deprive this court's jurisdiction to issue necessary writs. It directed the fourth respondent (Inspector of Police) to immediately look into the grievance and provide protection.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.4 to look into the grievance immediately, provide necessary protection for petitioner's life and limb, and be personally responsible for any casualty.

M.G. Gangaiah Vs the State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 01^ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.20490 OF 2021 (GM-POLICE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M.G. GANGAIAH, S/O LATE GANGADHARAIAH (GANGEGOWDA), AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT NO.110, R.M.V. LAY-OUT 2^ND STAGE, 4^TH BLOCK, M.L.A. LAY-OUT, BENGALURU - 560 094.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. RAJU BHAT, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, BENGALURU WEST, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANNAPURNESHWARI NAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU URBAN, BENGALURU - 560 091.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR M, ADVOCATE)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN TO EXTEND APPROPRIATE POLICE PROTECTION TO THE PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING THE

¶19

¶20

REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE OFFICE OF 4TH RESPONDENT ON 22.06.2019 VIDE ANNEXUREA AND REPRESENTATION DATED 17.07.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The short grievance of the petitioner is against non -

¶24

consideration of his request for adequate protection of his life & limb in view of a legitimate apprehension of attack at the hands of hooligans.

¶25

Learned AGA on request having accepted notice for the respondents although initially resisted the writ petition contending that petitioner has already obtained a Court Decree in O.S. No.4660/2016 and therefore he should seek refuge in its execution. Having so resisted the writ petition, now he fairly submits that he would instruct his client to look into the grievance of the petitioner in a time bound manner; this is appreciable.

¶26

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off directing respondent No.4 to look into the grievance of the petitioner immediately and take necessary steps for protecting his life & limb keeping in view the

¶27

¶28

potential threat and also Court Decree in question. If something happens to life or limb of the petitioner, the fourth respondent shall be personally responsible for the same.

¶29

All contentions are kept open.

¶30

Cost made easy.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

DS/JY

M.G. Gangaiah v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.G. Gangaiah v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bheema Naika Vs the State of Karnataka

A v Anantharaman Vs the Principal Secretary to the

M/S Rajeshwari Engineering Works Vs the State of Karnataka

All India Union Bank Officer'S Federation Vs Union Bank of India

M/S Qball Max Sports Center Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Radiant Infosystems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Karnataka State Electronics